How are Ukrainians to build their future?

After the recent statements made by the leading French and German politicians and echoed by US experts, even the most optimistic Ukrainian politicians, who had until then been “absolutely sure” that this country would have NATO membership or least its Membership Action Plan within the next several years, had to realize that our entry there is barred. Some of our leading politicians declared that [the meeting in] Bucharest was Ukraine’s victory. Today, re-reading the triumphant statements of our president and foreign affairs ministry published prior to the NATO summit in December, one feels uncomfortable on behalf of our high-ranking fellow countrymen.

Who has blocked our road to the West? For many the answer is clear: Russia, Germany, and France. By accepting this thesis as the singular true perception, we will never get any closer to the West because we have done most of the blocking ourselves. If Ukraine were really prepared to join NATO, Russia, Germany, or France would not be able to prevented it from doing just that, considering that NATO means not only Germany or France.

What makes us unprepared? First, there is a lack of public support of the very idea, something that has been chewed over by the media. Some argue that certain countries did not have much public support either at the time when joined NATO. True, but those were newly formed nations that did not have polarized views on other matters like the language, economic cooperation preferences, and cultural and historical heritage. In those countries varying attitudes to NATO were not a problem capable of triggering conflicts or a rift in the nation. This problem would not be so pressing in Ukraine if it were not connected with other important problems, which have been mentioned above.

In fact, for Ukraine the problem of NATO membership is one of choosing the vector of our further development. This problem remains unsolved. We do not know which vector our next government and president will choose. Those who know enough about the situation in the Crimea or in eastern Ukraine will agree that it is not very difficult for the anti-Ukrainian forces to generate a critical situation there. Many still remember the helpless position of the central government when the anti-Ukrainian forces, guided by Russian consultants, staged a witch-hunt for NATO servicemen before a [joint] exercise in the Crimea—the exercise was canceled for precisely this reason. Nothing like this would be possible in any other country seeking NATO membership.

Furthermore, no Eastern European countries that have joined or are about to join the Alliance have been exposed to such powerful information pressure from a neighboring country that regards NATO as a rival bloc as Ukraine has been from Russia.

Finally, no other Eastern European country has been gripped by as deep and long political crisis. In our interdepartmental analyses we admit that we have no clear idea of how we will come out of this crisis. Neither does the West.

Another alarming fact is that our Western partners cannot as yet find realistic politicians in Ukraine who can be expected to effectively lead this country out of the crisis. Neither can we. It should be understood that most European colleagues have lost confidence in our current political leadership because of their absolutely unprofessional actions (despite the Western politicians’ diplomatic smiles and polite yet ambiguous statements). Moreover, some of our leading politicians are increasingly becoming the laughingstock in Ukraine, Russia, and to the west of the Ukrainian frontier. How is one to assess the dismissal of the foreign affairs minister immediately after he warned the Russian ambassador that he had acted in excess of his diplomatic authority?

This means that the Verkhovna Rada and the government have made a complete transformation of Ukraine’s political course — and this is precisely how it is viewed abroad. If our politicians had something else in mind during the vote, it means that we are being led the people whom the noted Russian thinker Ivan Ilyin once described as infantile statesmen and political half-wits.

None of the Eastern European countries that have joined NATO had such a negative reputation as Ukraine does now. The positive image we have after the Orange revolution has been destroyed by the leaders of this same revolution after they came to power. In fact, these politicians continue to aggravate it. Considering the active support they are receiving along these lines from the Communists and the Party of Regions in parliament, as well as from our “Russian brother,” we have very chances to correct this image.

Regrettably, most people in Western Europe have negative associations with the word Ukraine: acute political and economic problems, corruption, siphoning off Russian gas, miserable financial condition of most of the population, the mind-boggling wealth of the oligarchs, and so on. There is no Iron Curtain between Ukraine and Europe, so Europe knows us quite well. There is no way we will deceive anyone there. People in many Western European countries may think that their politicians who support Ukraine are playing a reckless, very risky political game, which, if true, will cost them many votes in the next election.

In Eastern European countries public opinion on NATO membership varied, but there was consensus in the political and economic elite. Ukraine has no such consensus and none is expected in the nearest future. Neither the Western European governments, nor the new US administration will support Ukrainian politicians’ aspirations for NATO and EU membership, considering that these latter politicians may find themselves out of business within a year or even sooner, after which Ukraine’s political vector may make a complete turnaround. Western politicians who still hope to continue their political careers will not want to get into a mess like that.

What regards the Baltic States, which entered NATO with varying popular attitudes to this bloc, in these countries there was practically a 100 percent consensus among the indigenous population. In Ukraine even ethnic Ukrainians are divided on certain issues, including NATO membership.

Let us face it: everyone who has visited a Baltic village or city realizes that it is part of Europe. Saying this about most Ukrainian villages and provincial towns would mean making Europeans laugh and deceiving ourselves. A large and unbalanced country, Ukraine will cause problems for NATO that will be several orders of magnitude bigger that those the bloc faced when it accepted the small Baltic States.

These factors constitute the main obstacle on Ukraine’s way to NATO and the European Union. The number one task is to make every effort to resolve these problems. Ukraine must be strengthened economically as well as politically. It is high time the wisest owners of our big and middle-size capital started acting resolutely, primarily by making investments in the upgrades of the country’s economy and political life. What we have now is no longer a democracy. It is the eve of an authoritarian regime or further weakening and destruction of this country. Our business does not need to feed political adventurers and nincompoops—this would mean wasting money because such politicians are provoking instability, a destructive factor for serious entrepreneurship.

Of course, there are other barriers on the road to NATO and the European Union, like the economic and political interests of Germany and some other European countries that are competing with the US and are interested in upholding partnership with Russia. These countries are also afraid that Ukraine may turn into a powerful political and economic rival.

However, can’t we make Ukraine an attractive investment opportunity for these countries and bind them with economic interests? The appearance of foreign businessmen in Ukraine is a signal for crooks who operate within various kinds of Ukrainian organizations, ranging from firemen to municipal to central authorities. Yet even giving bribes does not guarantee success because of hostile takeovers, some of which are patently criminal, while others are sanctioned by the state.

In the end most such foreigners become disinterested in Ukraine and move to other countries. Our diplomats and politicians point to Russia’s authoritarianism while trying to convince their colleagues in the West that Ukraine is of value to them. This is a vain effort. It is precisely this authoritarianism in Russia and China that makes these countries valuable partners for Western capital.

The German giant concern Siemens recently announced that it is withdrawing its assets from France and starting collaboration with Russia’s experts in nuclear power stations. This collaboration is especially important for Germany because it will apparently gain access to the “hot” technologies (reactors and nuclear fuel), a sphere in which this country has been lagging behind its rivals because of its withdrawal from nuclear power engineering. Merkel and Putin placed this project under their personal control.

Given Russia’s authoritarian regime that instills fear in the country’s bureaucrats, this project will be given a green light without any ado. Therefore, authoritarian Russia is rather an advantage for big-time German entrepreneurs. Many of them do not give a hoot about by the Chechens or Russian democrats, which is sad but true. Democracy in Ukraine is something we, rather than Germans or the French, need. We must bear this in mind.

Merkel must have toughened her stand in the matter of Ukraine’s prospects for NATO membership after receiving signals from the US and reaching a nuclear power engineering agreement with Putin. Another thing that has to be taken into account is that the German Social Democrats, who are very influential in their country and elsewhere in Europe, at one time started building bridges with the USSR. For them collaboration with an authoritarian regimes has become a tradition, so they will not be scared by Russia’s authoritarianism. Violations of democracy should be discussed with Western European human rights champions and principled liberal politicians, not with businessmen or pragmatic politicians who represent their interests.

Needless to say, Ukraine must change its attitude to Russia. Naturally, we should not curry favor with it and give up our economic, political, and cultural interests. We must simply behave reasonably, with dignity, and without asking for trouble. We need to propose cooperation wherever it is mutually beneficial and assess the political situation in our region and elsewhere in the world several moves ahead, so as to avoid a total confrontation that would damage both Ukraine and Russia. In the event of conflict of interest between Russia, Ukraine, and other countries, we must be prepared in advance and act using all our resources, without expecting the situation to end in our favor simply because we are the good guys and all of them are the bad guys.

Snake Island, the gas war, and the NATO membership fiasco must finally teach our politicians a lesson. It is necessary to proceed from the assumption that we do not owe anyone anything, just as no one owes us anything. The French and the German government are serving the interests of their people (hence also their national capital). That was why they were elected. Let us hope that before long we will have politicians who will protect our national interests as skillfully as their French or German colleagues are doing. For example, most sober-minded analysts are of the opinion that the leading Ukrainian politicians and their aides, with the president topping the list, did all they could in between the two NATO summits, which were of paramount importance for Ukraine, in order to demonstrate to the West that, although we speak in favor of NATO membership, we actually do not care a bit about whether or not we will be admitted. The dismissal of the speaker several days prior to an important meeting of the Alliance was the worst possible reckless move that our pro-NATO party could make. Western European politicians do not forgive such blunders.

As long as our politicians remain below the European professional level, solving important problems with Ukraine will be very difficult, so allowing it to join NATO and the European Union at this stage would be simply dangerous for Western Europe. We must stop looking for guilty parties abroad and saying that German, French (and now American) politicians do not understand everything we do. We must set about correcting the situation in our country forthwith.

Corrections must be made in the Ukrainian foreign policy. Without upsetting relations with our current allies (the US, the UK, Poland, the Baltic States, etc.), we must continue looking for prospective economic and political partners, even friends, outside NATO and the EU. In the first place, we should take a closer look at China, Japan, Kazakhstan, and other countries. For example, we can learn from Kazakhstan how we can consistently and effectively defend one’s national interests while collaborating with Russia on many issues. It is necessary to build bridges with France, Germany, and other European countries. Therefore, taking part in any joint projects will pay off. Yet it is important not to lose old partners while making new ones. For example, some of our media are eager to antagonize Ukraine and Poland.

If we succeed in accomplishing all this, we will discuss our plans (including EU or NATO membership) with France and Germany as equals, standing a real chance of success. All our potential enemies have weak points that can be used to make them take our interests into account.